Admirers of Matt Cunningham’s stunning moral flexibility now have a new morsel to chew on – his successful “consulting” work last year, for “$1000 to $10,000” (probably $5000) to help the owners of the OC strip clubs “California Girls” overcome police objections in his town of Orange, and open up a new location there.

I’m sure you’ve seen the two California Girls in this county, a Santa Ana one on Harbor, and an Anaheim one on Brookhurst. Ever been in there? Well, you wouldn’t tell me if you had, so I’ll have to describe it to you. After the big bouncer checks you for weapons or photographic equipment and your eyes adjust to the dim light, you’ll see, up on a brightly lit stage, a shapely, scantily clad young woman, with a silly porn-like stage name, (who may or may not be “working her way through college,” but could just as well be a junkie) bumping and grinding through Guns and Roses’ “Welcome to the Jungle” or 2 Live Crew’s “Me So Horny.”

As alcohol is flowing freely at most hours of the day, the girl’s G-string legally has to stay on, but halfway through the number each perky breast is freed up to jiggle at the clientele. Drooling doofuses crowd the stage, lobbing dollars and fives at the dancer in hopes that she’ll arch her crotch ever closer to them, while winking and licking her lips.

Then if you’ve got twenty dollars (or more) you could go over to one of those chairs over there and get a “lap dance.” There is supposed to be NO TOUCHING during a lap dance, but the dancer will tease you by wagging her posterior and breastesses as close to your face as possible, while whispering sexy endearments. I don’t really like that kind of teasing, but obviously a lot of guys do. And I have it on good authority that, with the right combination of money and charm, and the right girl, she will slip off with you somewhere and do a lot more.

How do I know all this? Well, I can’t say I’ve been inside California Girls often, or recently, or never. (Long story.) It’s really not my kind of place, truth be told. But it’s not interesting that I’ve been in there – I’m just a regular guy.

I didn’t fight hard and successfully against the rights of gays to marry, claiming that it would harm “traditional marriage” in some mystical intangible way – that was Matt Cunningham.

I wasn’t such a loyal unquestioning Catholic that I went and humiliated myself defending Monsignor Urell, the notorious protector of priest pedophiles – that was also Matt Cunningham.

And I didn’t work for the owners of California Girls last year, helping them get past reasonable police objections – THAT was MATT.

To make it clear…

No, there is not a new branch of California Girls in Orange that you hadn’t heard of, as my ambiguous opening paragraph suggested, so put down your car keys. We’re talking about the Tilted Kilt that opened last year, which you’ve probably seen. A sort of Scottish-themed Hooters, it’s not precisely a strip club, but it IS owned by the guys who own California Girls. And the dress code for their youthful, stacked, female staff, seems to consist of short kilts, low tops, and powerful pushup bras – perhaps more acceptable to the family-values Jubal?

The two locations of California Girls are owned by two guys who officially go by the business name “OC Restaurant Group” – OC Restaurant Group’s actual office is hidden away inside California Girls’ Anaheim location, and California Girls seems to be all the OC Restaurant Group guys owned. That is an LOL right there. California Girls is not a restaurant. In fact, I became the strippers’ hero when I showed up once with bags full of Jack in the Box Teriyaki Dinners – every other guy there was just trying to get them drunk, so they could grab their asses whenever the bouncer turned his head!

Tilted Kilt, I assume, was these OC Restaurant Group guys’ effort to go “legit” – after all, Tilted Kilt IS actually a restaurant! But even more than that, Tilted Kilt is a bar, a bar specializing in hot young waitresses and loud music, a bar that demanded to have a happy hour, and a bar that demanded to build an OPEN PATIO out back. The Orange Police Department had real problems with all that, claiming there were already too many similar places in the area, that it would inevitably cause them more public safety problems, and they vowed to fight it at the Orange Planning Commission.

So the California Girls Guys went and hired Matt Cunningham to argue their case, against the police, in front of the Planning Commission, which he did successfully. He argued that they needed to be there for the local tax base, jobs, and economic development. He argued that they NEEDED to have that outside patio AND a happy hour for the local tax base, jobs, and economic development. He argued if any place was built at that location, it just HAD to be a Tilted Kilt owned by the California Girls Guys because of … the local tax base, jobs, and economic development.

It all sounds pretty absurd really – just think of all the other less problematic businesses that could have added just as much to the local economy. But Matt’s arguments prevailed over the cops’ public safety concerns. Which reminds me:

But one more little anecdote, an anecdote that suggests that the cops may have had a good point, and also shows the sort of people Cunningham works for:

Last March, only a couple months after the Tilted Kilt opened, a gentleman was put under restraining order for multiple incidents of excessive alcohol use and sexual battery on Kilt employees. The culprit? One of the owners of California Girls, i.e. one of the owners of the Kilt, i.e. Matt’s employer.

I’m not printing his name here (though you could look it up) partly because the case against him is still going through court, and also because I’m not interested in embarrassing him; he’s not the main villain here. He’s just another rough beast who contributes to our economy and has a hard time following the rest of our rules. I imagine that after years of behaving like the King at his California Girls, getting away with whatever he wanted, he had a hard time grasping that the dewy-eyed ingenues of the Kilt had not signed on to be his playthings.

Now, HERE’s where it gets SLEAZY:

When Cynth and I discovered that the frisky strip-club owner mentioned just above was also a land-use lawyer, we thought, “Well, why did he really need to pay thousands of dollars to Cunningham, to operate as a land-use consultant or lobbyist? Making his case to the Orange Planning Commission was something he should have been able to do himself.”

And the answer was obvious to anyone who happens to know this: Until recently Matt had been on the Orange Planning Commission himself, until being forced to resign. So Matt was being hired to lobby his old friends and colleagues. (Not to mention Cunningham presents a semblance of respectability in contrast to the horny strip club owner.)

This is the same sort of revolving door that disgusts the citizens of America, the constant spectacle of Congressmen and Senators moving on to become lobbyists and lobby their old friends and colleagues. It’s only natural that people listen to their old friends, and that people know how to present a case to their old friends. There’s nothing generally illegal about it, there just should be.

Oh. Did I say Matt had been forced off the Planning Commission? Yes, that’s true. And why was he forced off? For voting on matters affecting developers who were also paying him as a “consultant.” I don’t know how he got by with only being REMOVED for that. What a guy.

Well, enough Cunningham for now. I’m feeling a sugar rush. On to some more wholesome pursuit…

About Vern Nelson

Greatest pianist in Orange County, and official troubador of both Anaheim and Huntington Beach (the two ends of the Santa Ana Aquifer.) Performs regularly both solo, and with his savage-jazz quintet The Vern Nelson Problem. Reach at vernpnelson@gmail.com, or 714-235-VERN.

143 Comments

(1) Just when I thought this blog couldn’t sink any lower into the fever swamp — you post a story about me.

(2) Boy, I could hardly wait to see how you contort and twist these facts, and how you fill in the gaps of your ignorance to make everything fit your hallucinatory version of reality. But now that it’s come, I’m sort of disappointed and depressed.

(3) The fact that people pay you to play music for them means that you are in no position to judge anyone — for anything — at all.

(4) I have credibility!

(5) If jumping to conclusions were an Olympic sport, you would be the possessor of multiple gold medals. And if it were a cooking competition, the judges would love what you’ve served.

(6) You have a gift — if that is the right word — for gathering together facts here and there and cobbling them together in a narrative that is held together by the glue of your prejudices, speculation and paranoid assumptions. I’d like you to read that as a denial of some sort.

(7) Too bad Cynthia the fearsome researcher didn’t spend a a little bit of time making a few phones calls [sic]. Paper records are harder to obfuscate.

(8) CREDIBILITY! I HAVE IT!!!

(9) The Federal Trade Commission is coming after me.

(10) Don’t go looking for an actual denial of facts here anywhere, because you’re not going to find one.

OMG! Vern, another of your “venomous spiteful, un-American, far out of the mainstream, radical posts inciting others to gleefully speculate about it”. It is a good thing that you play for the church ladies, otherwise you would be a more evil person.

On the serious side, how is that Kris Murray count on this guy to lead the discussions on civic affairs in our city?

Am I correct to infer that you’re saying that you didn’t work for the two strip clubs, but merely for the corporation that owns the two strip clubs and had set up this Scottish-style Hooters knockoff to legitimize itself?

That fact is noted prominently in the body of the story. Would including the word “corporation” after “clubs” make it factually accurate enough for you?

“How sanctimonious Matt Cunningham worked and fought for Strip Club Corporation last year!”

Let me know if that small revision would satisfy your incipient complaint — and if not, why not.

Less accurate, though, as well as less damning. He was hired by a separate corporation, one in the skin biz, not by the owners in their individual capacities. “Hired by the owners” could mean “to play piano at a party,” like Vern does for people (without fully vetting them, I expect.) In this case, Matt would have — or at least could and should have — known exactly who he was giving a lobbyist lap dance.

Vern: The only thing you got wrong in this was that Matty defended the Orange diocese from “allegations” of sexual abuse. No—Matty knew full well of rapists priests, and he never excused them. Who he DID excuse, though, was the protector of those rapists, John Urell—which makes his actions even more disgusting. And, of course, he outed sex-abuse victims, which everyone should mention again and again. Good post, otherwise!

Explains why the Chamber doesn’t want to publicly disclose their funding of his blog….wise up, Matt, you are getting used. They send you off to do their dirty work (sometimes literally. Who introduced you to these guys?) and they will leave you twisting in the wind when they are done with you.

So the Chamber has been dishonest about not disclosing the funding? Their blog is a good project in the sense that is aimed to discuss the civic affairs of the city, the problem is their biased and exclusionary editorial focus. A healthy business climate requires the recognition and inclusion of the diversity of our community. Civil rights or community groups like Los Amigos, Somos Anaheim, even Save Anaheim should be given an editorial voice ( I know I am being naïve again….).

They are doing a disservice to the residents by being represented by such an extremist ideologue as Cunningham. It is also calls into the question the relationship between Cunningham and the pro Pringle majority in the council, especially Kris Murray. He gets a lot of inside city hall information favoring this group. Does Kris Murray want to further erode her political capital by being associated with this guy?

I’m aware that the current Chamber’s board is not interested in an honest discussion, and that they have a focused interest. However, there must be business owners who may not be pleased with being represented by Cunningham’s views promoting division in our city. One of them would the owner of the mall where the Starbucks is located in Anaheim Blvd. I don’t recall his name, but he has quietly helped to heal our city.

The author of this post has four convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol, for which he had to serve several months in jail. That’s not “ambiguous” or an “assumption” on my part. That’s is the straight truth. And those are just the four times Vern Nelson was actually apprehended getting behind the wheel of a car while intoxicated. How many times did he endanger the lives of others when the police didn’t nab him?

This post is a conscious attempt by Vern Nelson to defame my reputation. That’s why Vern wrote that headline the way he did, in hopes that anyone Googling me would be misled in thinking (falsely) that I work for strip clubs. Vern admits his intent to mislead: “No, there is not a new branch of California Girls in Orange that you hadn’t heard of, as my ambiguous opening paragraph suggested…”

His account of my work for The Tilted Kilt in Orange is a gross misrepresentation and a mangling of truth. It is, in sum, a lie.

Vern confirms the shrewish Cynthia Ward was his partner in this defamation attempt. That’s helpful to know. So much for her moral posturing being a “truth teller” (or much of a researcher, for that matter).

The sad reality is it is more work to refute a lie than it is to tell one. And so it is here.

Vern Nelson claims (and in his telling, so does Cynthia Ward), that OC Restaurant Group owns the California Girls clubs. That is false. It does not. The client I represented, OC Restaurant Group dba The Tilted Kilt, owns The Tilted Kilt in Orange. That’s it.

Vern’s claim that the individual subject with the restraining order is an owner of California Girls is also false. Not only that, that individual’s involvement with the Tilted Kilt ended a number of months ago. Furthermore, and the alleged incidents to which Vern refers occurred several months after my work for Tilted Kilt ceased and have nothing to do with me — despite Vern’s sleazy attempt to link them to me.

For those readers interested the truth, here it is: OC Restaurant Group was planning to open a Tilted Kilt franchise in a vacant restaurant building at The Stadium Promenade in Orange. [Tilted Kilt is a restaurant, not a bar. It does not specialize in “loud music” (as Vern falsely claims) but is sports-oriented with high-quality food and beverages.]

This building had been vacant since the original occupant, Johnny Carino’s, closed in December 2008. During the intervening years, an attempt to open a Shakey’s pizza parlor in the building failed. [Vern Nelson claims in his post that anyone could have opened a successful restaurant at this location. Perhaps the impoverished business genius could explain why no had prior to the Tilted Kilt?]

Last year, I was hired by OC Restaurant Group to represent them in obtaining approval for some modifications to the CUP for the site. Chiefly, they wanted to expand the small existing patio and extend the permitted hours of operation until 2:00 a.m. Monday through Sunday – a reasonable request since no other restaurant in the Stadium Promenade had its hours of operation limited by their CUPs. The requested change in operating hours leveled the competitive playing field, nothing more.

Vern Nelson, naturally, twists the Orange Police Department’s position, and betrays his own ignorance of the City of Orange and the OPD’s traditional stance regarding the modification of CUPs for sites with an alcohol licenses. The OPD was not opposed to a patio per se — due to woeful research, Vern is unaware the vacant restaurant site already had a patio (albeit a small one).

The Tilted Kilt want to expand the patio, which required modifying the CUP. The PD opposed expanding the patio because that would create additional square footage in the City of Orange where alcohol could be served.

The OPD traditionally opposes applications before the Planning Commission that involve a new alcohol licenses or the expansion of existing alcohol service – period. During my years on the Orange Planning Commission, I can recall only one occasion in which they were supportive. The department also freely admits the Planning Commission usually does not agree with its recommendations of denial in such cases.

Contrary to the Vern’s claim in his post, I was not hired to deal with the OPD’s opposition. In fact, the OPD did not come out in opposition until a few months AFTER I was retained.

If Vern Nelson and Cynthia Ward had properly done their research — or had simply contacted me — they would have learned all this. They would have seen the memo I wrote to the Planning Commission rebutting the long OPD letter of opposition to my client’s requested CUP changes. Instead, Vern, with Cynthia Ward’s assistance, chose to recklessly misrepresent the matter in order to injure my reputation.

The Planning Commission unanimously approved all but one requested modification. I am proud of my work for The Tilted Kilt in Orange, which has been a huge success. It is the most successful restaurant in the entire franchise. It’s success has benefited the other restaurants in the Stadium Promenade as it draws more and newer patrons into the center. It has been a rising tide that has lifted all boats in that center, and has not presented problems for the police.

A POSTSCRIPT regarding Vern’s false representation of my Planning Commission service. It true I was pushed off (more than a year before being retained by the Tilted Kilt). But Vern claim that it was “for voting on matters affecting developers who were also paying him as a “consultant” is totally false – an absolute lie through-and-through and another example of reckless disregard for the truth. I never, as a planning commissioner, voted on a matter affecting a client. Never.

Not only am I innocent of Vern’s false charge, but it was also not the reason my appointer, then-Councilman Jon Dumitru, wanted to remove me from the Planning Commission. His real reason was I did not support him over Mayor Carolyn Cavecche in his last-minute, suicidal challenge to her final re-election bid in 2010. He wanted to replace me with someone who would support him over Tita Smith when he ran against her for mayor in 2012.

As it was, a majority if the City Council supported my resignation from the Planning Commission on my own terms, so I was not removed.

Vern’s sleazy guilt-by-association post is just that. It’s ironic: Vern Nelson and Cynthia Ward constantly claim I have no credibility, and yet continue to expend considerable energy on false and malicious attempts to not only discredit me, but in this instance to defame me. Their sleaziness, disregard for the truth, the attempts to deliberately mislead readers, the numerous false and unsubstantiated claims he makes in an attempt to damage my professional and personal reputation — all the moral dreck they try to smear on me really attaches to them.

“I know you are but what am I.” The favorite refrain of both Matt and Dan.

I loved Matt calling us ankle-biters, because it demonstrates so well that he considers the folks we criticize to be some kind of giants, worthy of respect; and he is a courtier to them who feels superior to those of us who cause them some discomfort.

Also, the touch of “I have rarely seen” rather than “I have never seen” I took as a subtle nod to Bushala’s Friends For Fullerton’s Future, which was just as venomous, grandiose, self-important, and ankle-bitey.

David Zenger

Posted December 29, 2015 at 10:56 AM

Not a courtier, which at least would imply some sort of low-grade nobility.

Think instead of a medieval chronicler, set up to heap praise on and positively distort and exaggerate the doings of the king. The chronicler was just about the only guy around who was literate due to a generally rote and footling education in Church schools that favored endless argumentation on selected trivial points.

Vern Nelson claims (and in his telling, so does Cynthia Ward), that OC Restaurant Group owns the California Girls clubs. That is false. It does not. The client I represented, OC Restaurant Group dba The Tilted Kilt, owns The Tilted Kilt in Orange. That’s it.

Go to the California Secretary of State’s corporation search and search limited liability companies for “OC Restaurant Group”. (There’s only one result.) Then type the registered address of OC Restaurant Group — 807 S. Brookhurst, Anaheim — into Google Maps.

Didn’t really want to bring up Mike Ayaz’ name. He and Earl Glenn Smith own OC Restaurants Group. And California Girls. And Tilted Kilt. Last I checked. I could give a lot more details about the restraining order, and who’s representing the girls, but I prefer not to veer off into that territory.

Cynthia, whose has all the documents, will be by later to make a hash of most of Matt’s claims. Right now something a little bigger is happening.

Well how about we begin with the big stuff and then work our way down? Matt mentions defamation, and while I am not a lawyer, nor have I ever played one on TV, I think we can establish I know a number of them, and have no problem using them when needed. So before I have someone open a new file, let’s tap into a basic free online legal dictionary and look at “defamation”…

Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person’s reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.
Defamation may be a criminal or civil charge. It encompasses both written statements, known as LIBEL, and spoken statements, called slander.

The probability that a plaintiff will recover damages in a defamation suit depends largely on whether the plaintiff is a public or private figure in the eyes of the law. The public figure law of defamation was first delineated in NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 (1964). In Sullivan, the plaintiff, a police official, claimed that false allegations about him appeared in the New York Times, and sued the newspaper for libel. The Supreme Court balanced the plaintiff’s interest in preserving his reputation against the public’s interest in freedom of expression in the area of political debate. It held that a public official alleging libel must prove actual malice in order to recover damages.

The Court declared that the First Amendment protects open and robust debate on public issues even when such debate includes “vehement, caustic, unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.” A public official or other plaintiff who has voluntarily assumed a position in the public eye must prove that defamatory statements were made with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard of whether they were false.

Where the plaintiff in a defamation action is a private citizen who is not in the public eye, the law extends a lesser degree of constitutional protection to defamatory statements. Public figures voluntarily place themselves in a position that invites close scrutiny, whereas private citizens who have not entered public life do not relinquish their interest in protecting their reputation.

Distinguishing between public and private figures for the purposes of defamation law is sometimes difficult. For an individual to be considered a public figure in all situations, the person’s name must be so familiar as to be a household word—for example, Michael Jordan. Because most people do not fit into that category of notoriety, the Court recognized the limited-purpose public figure, who is voluntarily injected into a public controversy and becomes a public figure for a limited range of issues. Limited-purpose public figures, like public figures, have at least temporary access to the means to counteract false statements about them. They also voluntarily place themselves in the public eye and consequently relinquish some of their privacy rights. For these reasons, false statements about limited-purpose public figures that relate to the public controversies in which those figures are involved are not considered defamatory unless they meet the actual-malice test set forth in Sullivan.

Determining who is a limited-purpose public figure can also be problematic. In Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, 96 S. Ct. 958, 47 L. Ed. 2d 154 (1976), the Court held that the plaintiff, a prominent socialite involved in a scandalous Divorce, was not a public figure because her divorce was not a public controversy and because she had not voluntarily involved herself in a public controversy. The Court recognized that the divorce was newsworthy, but drew a distinction between matters of public interest and matters of public controversy. In Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111, 99 S. Ct. 2675, 61 L. Ed. 2d 411 (1979), the Court determined that a scientist whose federally supported research was ridiculed as wasteful by Senator William Proxmire was not a limited-purpose public figure because he had not sought public scrutiny in order to influence others on a matter of public controversy, and was not otherwise well-known.

Since our arguments are taken directly from public records, including 700 forms filed by Cunningham himself, City Council Meeting Minutes and Agendas, and DRC Meeting Minutes and Agendas, as well as information provided by the Secretary of State, I would say that we have gone to great lengths to determine our statements are factual, and charges of intentional falsehood seem unlikely to stick. But Matt is welcome to try…

Then there is a matter of whether Matt Cunningham is considered a “limited purpose public figure”, and certainly his responsibility to file 700 forms as a Public Official would seem to place him in that category, as I am so often reminded by my service in a similar capacity.

Then there is this little gem… public figures have greater access to the means to publicly counteract false statements about them. What do you think? Does Matt Cunningham have the means to counteract statements against him? How about just plain factual statements he is horrified his wife and priest might see?

What do you think Greg? I see an opportunity to get Matt into depositions and ask all kinds of questions about how he earns a living, given the countersuit…and the request for attorney’s fees from a frivolous suit….

For the record Matt, I did not co-write the piece, and I could do without Vern’s scantily clad women making it difficult for me to email the piece out to my entire reading list, but yes, I did share publicly available 700 forms with Vern. My intent was to show that Matt Cunningham’s holier than thou attitude demanding that we in Anaheim show deference and respect for the Police even when they offer no physical evidence to back up their statements, seems to fall by the wayside the minute someone waves a dollar bill in front of his face, an especially disgusting thought given where the dollar bill likely has been in this case.

When did you become such a spite-filled shrew, Cynthia? For all your laments about “lack of civility” you are unable to disagree with anyone about politics or policy without demonizing them or completely distorting their views or trying to destroy them.

MC says: “Vern Nelson claims (and in his telling, so does Cynthia Ward), that OC Restaurant Group owns the California Girls clubs. That is false. It does not. The client I represented, OC Restaurant Group dba The Tilted Kilt, owns The Tilted Kilt in Orange. That’s it.”

So the Secretary of State is incorrect Matt? Or did I photoshop the Secretary of State’s website info? How about the fact that the address you gave on your 700 forms lists the OC Restaurant Group at the California Girls strip club in Anaheim? Matt, I drove over there to make sure it was not a glitch with google street view! A mere coincidence?

MC says: “Vern’s claim that the individual subject with the restraining order is an owner of California Girls is also false. Not only that, that individual’s involvement with the Tilted Kilt ended a number of months ago. Furthermore, and the alleged incidents to which Vern refers occurred several months after my work for Tilted Kilt ceased and have nothing to do with me — despite Vern’s sleazy attempt to link them to me.”

Hmm….so the attorney who filed the restraining order incorrectly identified the man he filed a restraining order against? And the Secretary of State’s website is incorrect. And I suppose the Meeting Minutes from the City of Orange Planning Commission and DRC meetings are incorrect as well? Only Matt tells the truth, everyone else is lying?

Let’s go back to the Planning Commission minutes;

“Mr. Ayaz thanked the Police Department and appreciated their comments. He wanted to be on a level playing field for his business. He was a land use attorney and he understood what it meant to have rights. The right of property was one of the most valuable things that were taught the first day of law school. He just wanted the same rights as everyone else.”

Does this sound like the owner to YOU? How about this, again from the PC mtg;
“Mr. Ayaz stated with the website, they were in the business of marketing and if they reviewed competitor’s websites, such a Buffalo Wild Wings, it was a beer tap being poured into a giant glass with the slogan “live by the sauce”, it was a marketing campaign. In speaking of management, he was a practicing attorney and he was taking a leave from that to run the business. He was very familiar with running a restaurant. His family owned Renata’s across the street for a number of years, they owned Giovanni’s in Fullerton for a number of years, New York Pizza and others.”

Who takes a leave of absence from their law practice to run someone else’s place?
And Matt, nobody says you helped the dirtbag do the drunken kilt-grab on those girls, so whether you were still connected or not is immaterial to us. Our concern is you stood before the City of Orange and went to bat for these people.

Minutes from the DRC mtg show:

“Applicant, Matt Cunningham, address on file, stated he was available for questions on the submittal before them.
Applicant, Mike Ayaz, address on file, stated he was accompanied by his architects, designers,and developers, and they were also available to answer any questions the Committee Members had.”
PC meeting http://www.cityoforange.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=11506

Cynthia, you and Vern can link to outdated info on the SOS website or whatever else you hope and pray proves your smear to be true. It doesn’t matter: your smear is still false, and you are still party to wrongly and maliciously trying to damage the reputation of another person (me) reputation simply because you disagree.

It’s funny to have you quoting PC minutes to me, because unlike you, I was actually there. Unlike you, I know the truth of this matter. I have already spelled it out. I cannot help it if you are more interested in smearing me than in “truth telling.”

But I will spell it out again in the almost certainly vain hope that some small part of you is not so consumed with bile that you do care about trying to be truthful.

My client was an LLC, the OC Restaurant Group. OC Restaurant Group did not, does not, and never has, owned California Girls. I have never done any work for California Girls. No matter how hard you and Vern try to mislead people into thinking otherwise, it isn’t true.

Wow, Matty’s misogynistic true colors are coming out! Calling Cynthia a shrew and a harpy! If only he had the stones to call his beloved John Urell—who allowed boys and girls to get savagely sodomized by many priests—such nasty words. Of course, Matty is such an apologist coward that he won’t.

MC says: “The OPD traditionally opposes applications before the Planning Commission that involve a new alcohol licenses or the expansion of existing alcohol service – period. During my years on the Orange Planning Commission, I can recall only one occasion in which they were supportive. The department also freely admits the Planning Commission usually does not agree with its recommendations of denial in such cases.

Contrary to the Vern’s claim in his post, I was not hired to deal with the OPD’s opposition. In fact, the OPD did not come out in opposition until a few months AFTER I was retained.”

“Commissioner Gladson stated it was unusual to have a recommendation from the Police Department for denial which had been clearly communicated. She was hearing a kind of verbal recommendation on the land use aspect of the project. She asked if that was a fair statement.”

“Commissioner Cathcart stated he had a question for the Police Department. For the previous tenant at that site, Johnny Carino’s, he asked if the Police Department had opposed that restaurant.Orange Police Department’s Lieutenant Burton stated as far as the Police Department’s position on the Johnny Carino’s application he was not certain if that had been approved or opposed by the Police Department and his best guess would be that they had not opposed that restaurant. The issue with the Tilted Kilt was that it was a significantly different business model and created significantly different issues for the Police Department.”

“The Police Department is not in support of the applicant’s efforts to increase the size of the patio or modify the Conditions of Approval for the existing CUP. Based on the over concentration of alcohol within the census tract licenses and high crime within the reporting district, the Police Department memo states that the proposed modifications to the existing CUP and patio expansion will likely have an adverse impact, from a crime perspective, on the surrounding community based on the over-concentration of on-sale and off-sale licenses within the census tract and high crime in the area. This could increase the potential for deterioration to, or special problems at adjacent uses that could lead to an increased number of calls for police and/or fire services, increased crime, and diminished quality of life in the area.”

“Mr. Cunningham stated his group had met with the Police Department in April and had met with Sergeant Nichols and that had been a very positive meeting and they had come away with the view that the Police Department was amenable to their proposed project and they had been asked to submit draft language regarding the admission fee for the Pay Per View events. Subsequently, they met on July 5 and by that time Sgt. Nichols was no longer assigned to ABC duty and they had met with Sergeant Monjaraz and Lt. Burton and at that time the Police Department notified him that they would be opposing the hours of operation modification, happy hour and the request to expand the patio. The representatives for the Tilted Kilt respectfully disagreed with the opinions expressed by the Police Department and the proposed conditions from the Police Department would place the Tilted Kilt at a competitive disadvantage to other restaurants in the center. They disagreed with the Police Department’s opinion that the patio expansion was unsecured and inhibited monitoring of patrons on the patio. The existing patio was 774 square feet and the proposal was for expansion to 1832 square feet with an indoor/outdoor bar with a large garage door sized window which would improve line of site monitoring of the patio by restaurant staff. The patio landscape would act as a buffer and would be more secure than what currently existed at the site. He presented various slides for comparison with other Stadium Promenade venues. Mr. Cunningham stated on the issue of happy hour, all the other venues in the Stadium Promenade offered happy hour. There were conditions in their respective CUPs’ that prohibited 2 for 1 drink specials and that same condition was included in the Tilted Kilt’s proposal; Condition No. 21. Denial of a happy hour would place the Tilted Kilt at a severe disadvantage. He presented slides of the other restaurant’s happy hour advertisements. The draft resolution mirrors the findings for approval of the previous approval for the Shakey’s venue, the conditions were nearly identical with the following changes to Condition No. 5, 21, 22, 23, and 25; with deletion of 24 and 34 and they were asking to combine Conditions No. 27 and 32; and to add the Police Department’s Condition No. 21. It was an unusual request, however, based on the economic hardship even a 2 week delay would cause. By taking an action of approval and adopting the draft Resolution that was been presented, this would allow the applicant to open for business in November; a delay in a decision would delay them to opening in February based on a number of factors. Their request was to bring an exciting and successful proven use to a site that had been vacant for nearly 4 years and the property owners were in full support of the proposed project to renew vitality and attractiveness to the center. The restaurant would generate tax revenue and provide job opportunities and bring a good corporate citizen into the community of Orange.”

Hmm…does that sound like Matt is debunking the opposition of the Police? It does to me…

“Mike Ayaz, address on file, thanked the Commissioners, Staff and Police Department for their time and consideration”……”He was a businessman and a lawyer by trade and all he wanted to do was be on a fair playing field. The Police Department’s memo requested a change to the hours of operation; however, all the other businesses in the center were allowed to remain open and were not limited. Happy hour was another component of their business that everyone else was being able to hold and to be ostracized as the only restaurant not being able to offer happy hour would put him behind the eight ball even before his $2,000,000 investment began. He had members of his team present to explain what a delay would cost him in sales as well as to advise them of the training schedule.”

From OPD, outlining their objections;

“Johnny Carino’s was a traditional restaurant that focused on the service of food and had been more family oriented and had hours of operation that were more consistent with other restaurants in the center. The concern with the hours of operation, centered around the clientele that the Tilted Kilt would bring, the sports events would draw a younger crowd and predominantly male. That was evidenced by the costumes or the uniforms of their servers and that environment. That group was the group that created the most problems when combined with alcohol from the Police Department’s perspective. It would be far different from what Johnny Carino’s had been.”

So, let me get this straight, if it is OK to dismiss the findings of the Police department because they “always” oppose alcohol licenses, then is it OK to question the Police when they “always” say their shooting victim was a dangerous gang member? Just as you want evidence that the plans for the Tilted Kilt would really create a problem, I expect something more than just the say so of PD and the DA before sharing their judgment on others without proof. It’s called an even playing field, isn’t that what you called the need to treat all restaurants the same? (BTW I you were to audit the Tilted Kilt, do you think they make more profit from alcohol sales or food? Learn the difference between a bar and a restaurant. )

“Commissioner Gladson stated it was unusual to have a recommendation from the Police Department for denial which had been clearly communicated.

You’re problem here, Cynthia, is you cherry-picking from the minutes, but you are ignorant of the larger context and of Orange. Unless you are really going to maintain that you are more knowledgeable about OPD and Orange Planning Commission matters than i am?

Among the things you don’t know is that Commissioner Gladson hadn’t been on the Planning Commission for very long at that point. If you like Cynthia, I can put you in touch with quite a few source who can confirm that my description of OPD recommendations is accurate.

“So, let me get this straight, if it is OK to dismiss the findings of the Police department because they “always” oppose alcohol licenses, then is it OK to question the Police when they “always” say their shooting victim was a dangerous gang member?”

So let me get this straight, Cynthia: you are really going to compare a CUP modification to the investigation of a police shooting? I know you think yourself very clever, but the impression you give with this sort of argument is quite the opposite.

(BTW I you were to audit the Tilted Kilt, do you think they make more profit from alcohol sales or food? Learn the difference between a bar and a restaurant. )

They make more money from food, Cynthia. Learn not to talk out of your rear-end for a change.

And you still have not able to prove your smear nor refute my response – which isnt surprising.

As far as when you were hired, nobody really cares when you were retained Matt, what we care about is what you “had to do for that twenty”. The Meeting Minutes show you representing the appellant at the City of Orange, with Mike Ayaz, who also gave testimony at the meeting. The two of you tag teamed the meeting, and like Vern I would also like to know why…after all Mike Ayaz is a real estate attorney, and I found at least one case where he successfully had the Anaheim City Council overcome their own zoning laws on behalf of a bar, throwing out the parameters for the Brookhurst Commercial Corridor overlay which was meant to move an area of West Anaheim away from alcohol focused businesses.

So with such a track record of his own to fall back on, what did Mike Ayaz need you for?

MC says: “As it was, a majority if the City Council supported my resignation from the Planning Commission on my own terms, so I was not removed.”

Well Matt, here is the Agenda http://www.cityoforange.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=9093
for the Orange City Council meeting of Feb 8, 2011. It shows that the Orange City Council is scheduled to discuss removing you from PC, and I do not imagine Dimitru allowing the item to get as far as being Agendized if he didn’t think he had the votes.
Here are the meeting minutes

Reflecting the actions of Council several days later, showing they allowed you to resign. If Council gets as far into the process of removing you as to let the item get placed on the agenda, it is a sure bet you are a goner. That is not my definition of “resigning on my own terms”…but then you and I also have differing opinions on everything from what makes a good leader to what makes a good cop, so I do not doubt we differ in our opinion of what being unceremoniously tossed out on your ass looks like.

MC says: “Vern’s sleazy guilt-by-association post is just that. It’s ironic: Vern Nelson and Cynthia Ward constantly claim I have no credibility, and yet continue to expend considerable energy on false and malicious attempts to not only discredit me, but in this instance to defame me. Their sleaziness, disregard for the truth, the attempts to deliberately mislead readers, the numerous false and unsubstantiated claims he makes in an attempt to damage my professional and personal reputation — all the moral dreck they try to smear on me really attaches to them.”

No Matt, I have never taken a dime from a strip club owner, and I am pretty sure Vern can say the same, even if a few bills have made their way in the other direction. At least with Vern it would have been an open and honest transaction. The only person here who seems to have disregarded the truth is you, and your finger pointing back at those who are doing nothing more than exposing the sleazy deals that Anaheim’s power brokers have been crafting for far too long, lately with you along as the court jester to amuse the Masters of the Universe.

This transaction, reported by Vern based on very real documents in public records I unearthed, one of which YOU provided for us, shows a very real pattern of hypocrisy and the twisting of moral values to fit what you want them to be. Where were you when it was time to “support your Police” by accepting their statements at face value?
Ultimately, Matt, defamation requires a finding that thestatement decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

To do that we would have had to hold some level of respect, regard, or confidence for your prior to the article coming out.

Note that Dan Chmielewski came out in defense of Cunningham even before he had posted his rebuttal. Chmielewski took Cunningham’s words at face value. I posted a comment in his LOC blog, questioning again his complacency with Cunningham’s being a ” paid hack”, a term aptly used by Chris Prevatt. I understand the need to be as gentlemen as possible, but this man, Cunningham has being paid to create and maintain division, and an status quo that is no longer acceptable in Anaheim.

Amigo? Please, I am not Chmielewski. As you know I don’t have any respect for you and your views, as you don’t have the huevos to disclose that you are paid by the Chamber. No wonder Gustavo hounds you about outing sex victims. Man up for a change!

Anyway, how about this recent divisive, biased post in the Chamber’s blog?:

” The Left in Anaheim must be getting desperate, today’s press release from radical left-wing group OCCORD (Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development) …This is typical of the Left’s approach to politics: if you can’t win in the court of public opinion, then sue! Or in this case, ask government prosecutors to go after your opponents…”

The Chamber and Kris Murray must be very proud of your work in Anaheim.

I do not doubt that he is a “smart and decent human being”. Could it be that both of you share the same standards of respectable behavior defined by your common lobbying business activities?

Both of you are spin-masters, you in Anaheim and Chmielewski in Irvine. Both are so gentlemen that agree to disagree, no matter whether your political lobbying may have a negative impact on so many people. You are a paid hack. Chmielewski should be ashamed, of not being your buddy but for endorsing your divisive and elitist goals of keeping the disenfranchisement of significant number of people in Anaheim

I have since a young age been cautious of people who brag about “who they know”.

Both Dan and Matt are the kind of shallow personalities that post pictures of themselves and their families and friends with celebrities, politicans and other famous figures. This is to make up for their lack of self worth.

There is a huge psych profile on these types. They want SO bad to be important they do things like start blogs (relatively easy and risk free), brag about conquests and trips (“Sorry was off in Vegas….”), this is the shit Facebook was made for, unimportant self grandoising individuals.

If I ever post a picture of myself with the guy from Malcom In The Middle, my family has instructions to KILL me in my sleep. It’s allover at that point.

I’ve been teasing Matt about that for the last month. In an effort to make his blog a little more fun, and make himself seem cool, he talked about how he became an Adam Ant fan in high school, and how he ran into him at The Catch and got his picture taken with him. Matt and I are around the same age – I was a little older – and I know that only the biggest dorks liked “Adam and the Ants.” So I made fun of him in the comments.

At the end of his story, Matt tells his readers to “Have a rocking New Wave evening!”

Golden age — early 70s thru… no … Beatles & Stones thru about 1981. Various great eras in there. Although I know you turn up your nose at the Yes-type bands. You’re a musician aren’t you?

anon

Posted August 14, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Nah, I’m not a musician. I just think there’s good music to be found in every decade. Just comes down to personal taste. That said, age does tend to influence all that. It’s weird though…these days I’m really into electronic music and most of my friends still extoll the 60s and 70s stuff.

I didn’t listen to the radio in the 80s …. I only got turned onto bands by friends … the best I know of were
Butthole Surfers
Violent Femmes
Shriekback — but ONLY “Oil and Gold”
uh… that’s all I can think of

Greg Diamond

Posted August 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM

There was fantastic music produced in the 1980s — most of it before 1983 and most of the rest elsewhere in the world.

Gericault

Posted August 15, 2013 at 5:16 PM

Listened to the entire Agent Orange album the other day off youtube while cleaning my floors….god that shit was good. Saw them in the 80s at the fucked up shitty punk bar off GG Blvd…what was the name of the place?

Agent Orange! Led by guitarist/singer/songwriter Mike Palm! I worked with him at Smith Printers in Tustin (1980-81) before they got big.

Don’t know the Garden Grove place, but I sure remember the Costa Mesa place from that era, on Placentia Street – The Cuckoo’s Nest! MY band even played there a couple times – The Pedestrians.

Gericault

Posted August 16, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Gericault

Posted August 16, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Costa Mesa has always been ground zero….shame we didn’t have any of those bands play at the recent 60th celebration…..bunch of fifty and sixty year old punk rockers. FEAR, TSOL, Social Distortion, The Vandals, Bad Religion,….the list goes on and on. We did have the Animals, who were ordered to never return back to Costa Mesa after their 1960’s performance at the Newport Music festival, which took place at the Fairgrounds in “Costa Mesa”….but we completely ignored the punk rock movement which was encapsulated in The Cuckoos Nest.

GD/Mudge…the Sec of State will only give you the registered agent and the address on file with the Sec of State which are often the same. The registered agent is often not an owner but instead an attorney willing to accept legal service. Hopefully everyone is not confusing a registered agent with ownership.

I was hoping that there was a tool out there for ownership…I use the Sec of State’s business portal all the time, but ownership is not one of the items that they will provide.

I must be missing something here…I ask how someone knows who owns the entities/businesses mentioned above and I am referenced to the Sec of State site- no dice, that does not give that info. Then, I/we are provided an article from 2009 about a business in Tarzana…huh? How is that showing who owns what business? …help me out here….it sounded like there was hard evidence.

Greg Diamond

Posted August 13, 2013 at 8:57 PM

Didn’t he say as much to the Orange Planning Commission, for one?

LallyPop

Posted August 14, 2013 at 12:08 PM

You would know about bars gone bad Vern. Did you ever have to toss the salad in jail.

Ah, I get your point now. True, technically it doesn’t give you ownership, but it gives you a good lead towards ownership and sufficient information to file a lawsuit. Other factors (entity address is the same as agency address, entity address is not a law firm or legal services business, agent is not an attorney) increase the likelihood that you’ve located the owner.

OK…so it sounds like there is a good stretch going on. Of course, it is enough to file a lawsuit since that is what an agent of service is exactly designed to do–determines who gets served for a lawsuit. Regarding your other factors, OCRG’s agent of service, Ayaz, I think is an attorney from the info posted above (David Zenger’s post about his bar #). There are many people who serve as an agent of service and allow a business to utilize an address of the agent for a business address, since some business may take place there or it is the best place to securely receive mail.

Again, I was just hoping that there was a way to determine ownership from the Sec of State’s site for unrelated reasons…wishful thinking.

The Planning Commission meeting minutes where Matt is telling PC members about his meetings with Police to smooth things over also include Michael Ayaz making statements that he is taking a leave of absence from his law office to devote his time to building the restaurant, and he refers repeatedly to “my investment” and “my restaurant” as well as referencing his family’s long standing history in the restaurant business. In addition, the (now defunct) website from an attorney seeking additional plaintiffs who were willing to come forward with their own stories of alleged abuse or harassment related to him referred to him as one of the owners of the bar. Vern called that attorney and he did confirm the litigation is ongoing so did not seem to want to speak much. It seems the site was only up until they filed suit to see if anyone else needed help, and once they completed that use they took it down, which is cool, it indicates they are not needlessly subjecting him to humiliation for its own sake.

So I am not saying here that Ayaz did or did not harass anyone, just showing some of the reference material I gave Vern that he used to write the article. There were significant primary and secondary records to lead us to believe Mike Ayaz was at least one of the owners of the OC Restaurant group, along with at least one other individual I will not name here because he does not seem relevant to the discussion (other than being scum who owns the kind of business interests I found him linked to, but this is America and he has the Constitutional right to be a scummy skank you earns a living exploiting young women)

Hope that clarifies what is becoming a very confusing issue. The primary focus of the article was originally intended to be Matt’s dismissal of Orange PD’s concerns which seemed very valid, and dismissing them to benefit a guy who appears to possibly have turned out to be the very kind of trouble OPD feared would come in seems to have negative consequences. That Matt ignores his own Police department while getting paid to tell us we should believe everything our PD says even when not backed up by facts or evidence was disturbing to me. I fear Vern got carried away with the photos, which are attention grabbers but may not contribute to the discussion, even if they do contribute to number of male web hits. But the facts are as solid as government documents can provide.

In both criminal or civil cases a defendant has the right to be represented by counsel. In criminal cases the defendant shall be furnished counsel if he/she cannot afford an attorney. You should know that Vern.

Vern check the web address make sure Skallywag is not Matt posing as Skallywag.

Skallywag the primary point of this piece (at least as I saw it) was that Matt was being a hypocrite to demand that we in Anaheim set our reservations aside and take the word of all law enforcement as gospel even when not backed up by facts or evidence, while at the same time he is over in Orange dismissing the word of his own PD because an opportunity to make a buck relies on getting around the Police. Matt has gone so far as to mock those of us who would like more complete DA’s investigative reports, outright maligning those of us with NO criminal record in any way by calling us pro gang and anti cop, which is not fair. It is possible to respect law enforcement and appreciate the job that they do, while still expecting them to live by the same set of laws they enforce for us, and expecting the DA to provide the same level of investigation and evidence with officers as he does with civilians. To completely trash the reputations of those of us calling on the DA for better reporting standards that truly do make citizens feel that the cases have been thoroughly investigated, Matt has defamed US. To go that far only to turn around and blow off law enforcement in his own city when a check is involved is disgusting!

The point of showing the California Girls connection is simple; Had Matt been working for businessmen he knew to be fine, upstanding, moral and upright members of the community with a strong background in well run hospitality service establishments, one might understand his belief that it is OK to dismiss the fears and concerns of OPD. But instead he helped the restaurant owners set aside the concerns of OPD, to the advantage of guys that are about as low on the business totem pole as it gets. There was no logical reason for Matt to believe that the track record of these dirtballs was going to bring something of quality to Orange, certainly nothing in their history shows they will be bringing respectability to tiny kilts and even tinier tops. So what is Matt’s reasoning for blowing off the Orange Police Department and their very real concerns? And how are those reasons any more valid than the reasons we in Anaheim have given for saying we do not accept as complete the reports of our own PD in some areas and we want more information?

Our point is not that Matt works for scum, that is obvious based on who he works for now, our point is the hypocrisy of maligning some for a stand he himself does not adhere to when a check is waved in front of his face.

If Greg Diamond ran around saying the desal plant was terrible, and fighting it whenever possible, and then worked for a desal plant or fracking operation the minute someone offered him a fee, we would question him. And yes we WOULD question him.

It’s a lot like when Matt secretly made hundreds of thousands working for a wasteful liberal program, while blogging against government waste in the daytime. Except there were no sexy pictures to go with that story.

… this is really the saddest part of the whole Matthew Cunningham Story. The guy spends his entire life on the make, and all he’s got to show for it is a slice of average mid-level OC suburbia — something that a lot of other people have managed to get without continually prostituting themselves in the process. Cunningham may think we’re all haters, but for me, it’s more about pity. (The hate comes when Mr. Small Government thinks he’s entitled to a share of my tax money, funneled through his richer and better-connected friends, to write a blog lecturing me about how those friends deserve *even more* of that tax money.)

skallyway’s opinion about the VOC discussions allowing blather about crazy s**t may apply to this commenter:

“So how exactly are these guys “Republican operatives” — a loaded term with definite overtones of shadiness? My hunch is that if Norberto (whom I like and respect) tried to define it, he would realize the pejorative he used to describe these individuals doesn’t really apply.”

My dinner with Andre, was not this name of a movie? I am having a conversation with Dan in the LOC. If you don’t read the LOC, here is the exchange:

 Dan Chmielewski
August 12, 2013 at 9:53 am

I just saw the post on OJ about Matt. Wow, pretty libelous considering if Matt worked for a corporation that owned one restaurant and he had nothing to do with other business entities doesn’t warrant the charge that Vern is making.
Journalistically sloppy of OJ

Ricardo
Mr Chmielewski
One of Cunningham’s points in his rebuttal to Vern’s posting is this statement:
“Vern Nelson claims (and in his telling, so does Cynthia Ward), that OC Restaurant Group owns the California Girls clubs. That is false. It does not. The client I represented, OC Restaurant Group dba The Tilted Kilt, owns The Tilted Kilt in Orange. That’s it.”

It happens that OC Restaurant Group is located at 807 Brookhurst St, and one of the Girls Club is at 815 Brookhurst St. They could be different entities, but if they are the same, then your buddy Cunningham is not being straightforward.

In addition to the validity of the allegations and the facts, which remains to be further clarified, what is relevant to me is your eagerness to come out defending Cunningham right away. He posted his rebuttal after 12:00 PM, but you had already questioned Vern’s post before 10:00 AM.

I may understand that politics makes strange bedfellows, but your uncritical and “gentlemen” rapport with this hack is questionable.

BTW, I am still waiting to know Brandman’s response why he appointed Edinger to the CAC committee. You were going to ask him based on the only conversation I had with you regarding Anaheim.

1. Dan Chmielewski
August 15, 2013 at 10:19 am
Ricardo —
Apologies for not getting back to you sooner.

Matt and I are certainly never going to agree on everything political but Vern’s piece is journalistically unethical especially in his comments. Vern even went back a few years to find dirt on an owner and say “good thing he has Matt now” which strikes me as patently unfair.

Thanks for posting the addresses of both the strip club and the offices of OC Restaurant Group on the same side of the street. Is the Dalati’s Inc. next to OC Restaurant Group’s office also tainted because they are two doors down from a strip club? What about the Goodyear Tire Center right next to the strip club? If Matt did some consulting work for them, does their location taint them?

Matt’s work with OC Restaurant Group was restricted to work done for the Tilted Kilt, a chain restaurant, based in Orange, not Anaheim. He did no work for California Girls and even if the owner of OC Restaurant Group owned both establishments, to imply, as Vern did, that Matt took money from exploited strippers is a farce at best and libel at worst. Vern’s post has already been edited several times to adjust for text that doesn’t add up. Frankly, it’s an excuse for him to run a post featuring multiple photos of strippers working. If the shots are all from California Girls in Anaheim, that’s one thing. If it’s random stripper photos from the web, that’s journalistically dishonest.

If you want to go after Matt Cunningham for his Anaheim blog, go ahead. There’s plenty of fodder to hit him on.

Now I have enormous respect for Cynthia Ward and how Tom Tait is conducting himself here, but Vern’s post was simply an attempt to smear the opposition to drag them down to his level and Jason Young’s level. Quite frankly, the two biggest cheerleaders against the current city council are Nelson and Young who both have tainted personal records. If they truly want to help their side of the issue, let Ward and Tait do the heavy lifting and get in the ring. The more the public learns about Nelson and Young, the better the council majority looks.

Tait ought to show some leadership, ask both of them to come into his office, and ask them if they want his efforts to succeed. If both answer yes, Tait ought to ask them to let others do the talking.

Lastly, you made a point that no one was coming to defend Matt on the OJ blog. Defend him against a post that continues to change? A post that is in itself sleazy while calling Matt out as sleazy? A post with inaccuracies regarding how Matt left his commission post? A post written by a guy who did jail time with 4 DUIs? Oh and comments from Sgt. York, who was on the take for the Poizner campaign without disclosing it. And Gustavo chimes in too even though his publication needs every ad they get from those same Anaheim strip clubs, massage parlors, escort services and pot dispensaries. Moral high ground?

I’ve written a number of pieces against members of Irvine’s Republican council majority. I ask for comment. Some chose not to and that’s fine. When they don’t comment, I go with the story. But I do ask and give them more than 72 minutes before I publish the piece. Vern never called Matt to verify a thing. Since the post has been edited several times, I’d say Matt has grounds for a defamation suit if he chose to go that route. What the post revealed is how sloppy Vern’s work can be at times. And this post was sloppy.
I haven’t had a chance to speak with Jordan since our previous communication. My business commitments and other stories I am chasing are frankly more of a priority for me.

My advice: let Cynthia Ward do her thing. She isn’t tainted, she has credibility, and she’s determined.

But I have to ask Ricardo; have you ever been to the Hooters in Anaheim? The girls there wear less than the waitresses at the Tilted Kilt (they pass out coupons at the OC Scottish Festival so you know).

It is bad enough that Cunningham has a political position opposing change, which he is entitled to, but it is his hypocrisy of pontificating and not being transparent that is censurable.

Cunningham‘s blog is probably financed by public funds, through the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce administration of the city’s Enterprise Zone. Here he frames the arguments of the Chamber and his political patrons, and provides the talking points for their operatives. He brings up all the dirt which is later thrown against the people supporting council districts, opposing the giveaways. He demonizes opponents, smears them.

The criticism of his involvement with the Tilted Kilt, and the journalistic ethics used to portray his participation are summarized here: … “The point of showing the California Girls connection is simple; Had Matt been working for businessmen he knew to be fine, upstanding, moral and upright members of the community with a strong background in well run hospitality service establishments, one might understand his belief that it is OK to dismiss the fears and concerns of OPD. But instead he helped the restaurant owners set aside the concerns of OPD, to the advantage of guys that are about as low on the business totem pole as it gets.”

A definition of ethics in journalism states: … “Like many broader ethical systems, journalism ethics include the principle of “limitation of harm.” This often involves the withholding of certain details from reports such as the names of minor children, crime victims’ names or information not materially related to particular news reports release of which might, for example, harm someone’s reputation.[6][7](wikipedia)

You, Mr Chmielewski, are reluctant to recognize the negative impact of Cunningham’s operation. It is not a question of going after his blog. It is a question of how his political positions and actions make the healing process of our city harder, how the policies of the people he shills for affect the lives of many people. In this regard, I find your position shameful.

Is the connection to the ownership of the California Girls/Tilted Kilt relevant? Is this connection relevant to Cunningham, opposing the Orange DP concerns while smearing people in Anaheim for requesting that ADP change its insensitive culture towards Latinos? Isn’t Cunningham a paid hack, constantly trashing the reputation of his opponents? What is the ethical journalistic difference between Vern, with 4 DUIs, and spin-masters PR people like you and Cunningham?

This article provides plenty of facts that support the questionable character of Mr. Matt Cunningham. Cynthia has accurately labeled Cunningham as the court jester, he is a paid slanderer. Cunningham has a reputation as a paid shill and a hypocrite, we all can respect that.

GG, you (and Cynthia?) do a disservice to court jesters. They were the folks in a king’s court who had the license to tell THE TRUTH, as long as they made it humorous, and it was uncool for anybody to punish them for it. No, everyone had to listen to the jester, and learn. Please make ME the court jester, not Matt. Please?

The exchange between I and Dan Chmielewski ended up in unpleasant tone. He called me sleazy based on my response to his question of the “morality of business owner”.

DC :****I linked to a OC Register story about the Tilted Kilt which got into the owner’s and his family’s background in running other restaurants in OC. Anaheim has more strip clubs than any other city in OC. If the “owners” of the club pay their taxes, located their businesses in areas they are zoned for, pay their permits and follow the rules, not sure how that places them low on the business totem and that doesn’t matter as Matt’s work for exclusively for the Tilted Kilt in Orange. Why didn’t the owner do that work himself? Heck, maybe he was too busy to do it. And who are you to decide the morality of a business owner. I think it’s immoral for Disney to charge an adult price for a nine year old, but seriously…your argument here is weak sauce****

RT: “And who are you to decide the morality of a business owner” you ask me. I don’t decide the morality of business owners, but I can have an opinion. If a business is based on sex exploitation of minors or human trafficking, then what? I do not know if the owners of the Kilted Kilt/California Girls are in involved in this type of activities. Your link to the OC Register,” Pub with sex appeal opens in Orange,” is a PR piece, it is not a journalistic article. It does not cover the questionable aspects presented by Vern.

DC:If you think California Girls is engaged in human trafficking or sex exploitation of minors, ask the strippers how old they are they next time you’re there and then call the cops. That’s a real stretch to suggest Matt is somehow shilling for a business that sexually exploits children or is engaged in criminal activity. That reporter from the Register is a restaurant reviewer and I’ll be happy to let her know you think she writes PR pieces. That’s a legitimate news story written with …facts; I’m sorry you can’t tell the difference. One could argue ESPN engages in sexploitation when they switch from the football game to jiggle shots of cheerleaders….You actually took Vern’s contentions a little further by suggesting Matt is working for a business that sexually exploits minors and engages in human trafficking; how sleazy of you.

RT:The questionable business background of the KT/CG owners, and the role played by your buddy MC in overcoming the OPD objections, while pontificating in Anaheim about not questioning the APD, is the bottom line of this issue.

I am disappointed by you, not because we disagree or because I may be wrong, but for your vicious personal disqualification of calling me sleazy for following your logic on the morality of business owner.

DC:As far as the “sleazy” comment goes, I stand by it. You flat out said California Girls, a business Matt did NO work for whatsoever, was engaged in human trafficking and sexual exploitation of minors. Got any proof of that or any proof Matt knew of this and did work for the owners anyway? That, sir, is sleazy. And you should be offended not by me for calling you out on it but for your words. Tale responsibility for what you say. Because what you tried to say is bull.

RT:This is what I said :
“And who are you to decide the morality of a business owner” you ask me. I don’t decide the morality of business owners, but I can have an opinion. If a business is based on sex exploitation of minors or human trafficking, then what? I do not know if the owners of the Kilted Kilt/California Girls are in involved in this type of activities. Your link to the OC Register,” Pub with sex appeal opens in Orange,” is a PR piece, it is not a journalistic article. It does not cover the questionable aspects presented by Vern.”

DC:your parsing your words Ricardo. Nice try. You want Matt censured, but by whom? You want him to disclose, which serves no useful purpose as that detail is public knowledge. You can’t tell the difference between a press release and a bylined article.
You ever want to meet for lunch at the Tilted Kilt to talk about it, let me know, but you’re buying.

I don’t decide the morality of business owners, but I can have an opinion. If a business is based on sex exploitation of minors or human trafficking, then what? I do not know if the owners of the Kilted Kilt/California Girls are in involved in this type of activities.

and from that derived this?

You flat out said California Girls, a business Matt did NO work for whatsoever, was engaged in human trafficking and sexual exploitation of minors.

I sure am glad that he’s an expert on libel. Does he know what “flat out said” means?